from the but-not-completely dept

We've talked about the absolute ridiculousness of having a secret interpretation of a US law on surveillance such that the law actually means something different than what most people (including the politicians voting on it) think it means -- and yet the secret law remains in place for entirely secret reasons. The EFF, as part of an ongoing dispute over all of this, had submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request concerning some testimony on that secret interpretation, and it got back a "relevant" document... which as almost entirely redacted. Here's a sample page.

Much of it is blocked as "non-responsive" but the "responsive" section is basically entirely blacked out. The only text of the entire document that's available (other than the cover page) is:

The Government has provided copies of the opinions and the filings by the Government to this Committee, and the Government will continue to inform the Committee about developments in this manner.

It's ridiculous to continue arguing -- as Senator Dianne Feinstein has done repeatedly -- that there is no secret law here. She's being deliberately misleading, confusing "the law" with "the legislation." The legislation is the text as written by the legislature, but "the law" includes specific rulings by courts on the legislation. The legislation may be public, but the law is not when the rather important interpretations of the legislation remain completely redacted.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse

If I am taken to court, can I please Ignorance given the law was specifically not released to the public? The old adage is Ignorance of the law is no excuse, yet if a law is secret, then the default state is ignorance, thus is the law then not a law anymore?

Re: Re: Ignorance of the law is no excuse

But can any breach of this law get consequences? I am thinking, "Quis custodiet ipsos Custodes" or "Who watches the watchmen?"

Unless you can elect politicians for the committee enforcing the law, the law basically has no meaning. Even a politically appointed committee of politicians is a problematic construction unless there is some kind of reports available for the public and that will never happen!

Not even going to mention the insanity of letting politicians carry highly classified information. If you do, you are devaluing the information or corrupting the politician to not reason freely and thus removing even more credibility of the politicians, if they had any to begin with!

Re: Ignorance of the law is no excuse

In the case of FISA, the secrecy means that congress cannot hold the they cannot control the agencies they are meant to control because they do not know what they are allowed to do. They cannot even determine if they are telling the truth when they claim the court cleared their actions as being legal. The secret court decision has given the security services a carte blanche with respect to surveillance.

Re: Re: Ignorance of the law is no excuse

Re: Ignorance of the law is no excuse

You make the mistaken assumption that they actually have to tell you what you're being charged with. These days they can just hand-wave that 'inconvenience' away by uttering the magic words 'national security' or by invoking any of the other 'laws are for the peons, not the ones in charge' laws.

Re: Re: Re: Ignorance of the law is no excuse

maybe the reason Senator Dianne Feinstein was so forceful in getting the FISA term extended is that she has her own 'secret interpretation' of the bill? that would explain a little of why she lied through her teeth over it.

Stuff like this really pisses me off !!! For the last four decades or so I have been watching and what I see I am not liking at all.
A Big Fuck You to the US Government !
You Guys Truly Eat Dog Shit !!!

This could lead to a myriad of jokes but in the current state it's not even funny. When the US question shady laws or cases where the law has been misinterpreted on purpose can we please point at their faces and laugh while showing banners with FISA written all over?

Re: Police state

I can only hope someone in the senate takes the opportunity to seriously rub this in Feinstein's face, preferably with a loud, snarky "And what was that about 'no secret interpretation' you were saying?"

the reach of the law

I have heard that some senators are holding secret hearings to determine who has broken the law, including investigation of other senators and senior govt figures for their involvement in this. Expect it to be the biggest indictment of US govt personnel in history.

Re: the reach of the law

They arbitrarily decide that certain individuals are 'potential terrorists' without trial and then place them on no-fly lists, which is completely unconstitutional. Thus far there's several hundred-thousand people on it and none of these individuals know why they've been singled out. They even put war veterans on it, including one who's disabled.